Those who have upgraded from 5D MkII to MKIII

Jase

Jase

Jase

Soldato
Joined
19 Oct 2002
Posts
5,143
Location
Pembrokeshire
Do you think it was worth it?

I have a 5D MKII and the moment and on release of the MKIII I couldn't see much point in upgrading, however, now I'm getting tempted.

Therefore for those who have done the upgrade, what advantages have you seen with the MKIII and do you think it's worth upgrading to?

If not maybe I'll hold off and buy a 1D X in the future.

Thanks

Jase

P.S. Maybe a mod could change title to read MKIII :)
 
Last edited:
What do you shoot, do you need the AF? The difference in the sensor is not enough to justify an upgrade IMO. The 5dmkiii is very nice, but more like a 5dmkiis update to the original.
If you don't need the AF then invest in some glass.
 
The AF is the big gain. That's pretty much it from a worthwhile perspective. If you don't need it, then don't get it.

May be worth going somewhere to try one out, take your mkii with you, and see if the AF difference is worthy?

kd
 
The other annoying thing is they've fixed a few things which could be done on the mkii with a firware update like setting auto iso limits. I wish canon would support there cameras a little bit longer I was amazed when they released a decent firware update for the 7d but I think there is no hope of anything for the 5d mkii.
 
nice camera certainly from the AF/ISO perspective, but if you shoot studio or anything similar its largely an unnecessary upgrade.
If you roam a lot then it could be right up your street though, but then you might just spend the cash on some nice glass.
 
This feedback is kind of what I expected.. the AF and the increased fps is what's attracting me.

I shoot all sorts really from Landscape, Macro, Nature,Motorsports (hence wanting the increased fps). I've got a few good lenses however I'd love a decent telephoto so I could put the money towards that.

Maybe I'll hold off until the Focus on Imaging show and have a play with the range of Camera's there.
 
I needed the improved AF so I saw a massive benefit, also wanted the weather sealing and dual cards.

What feels weird, is if I pick the Mark II up now it feels like a dinosaur in comparison!
 
I had a long chat with a photographer using Mark III today. He'd upgraded from a Mk II and said it was a fantastic upgrade. He's a shoots a wide range of things, Weddings for a living, landscapes and wildlife for fun.
Not the most insightful of inputs but I thought I'd mention it.
 
Your comments are interesting Phate, I think the only way I'll know is by having a play with one so I'll try to do that as the MKIII specs seem to mak it a better all rounder. I'm already building a list of stuff I want to check out/get at the Focus on Imaging show so will probably wait until then and compare my MKII to the MKIII and that to the 1D X.
 
if money is no object, its a good upgrade. (and a very nice camera)

if your counting the pennies, you can get by on a mkii
 
1DX? Quite a considerable jump! :D

Phate said:
I needed the improved AF so I saw a massive benefit, also wanted the weather sealing and dual cards.

What feels weird, is if I pick the Mark II up now it feels like a dinosaur in comparison!
Click to expand...

Yeah the MkII feels a bit less robust and looks a bit squarer than the III. The one thing (the only thing) I don't like though is that it never completely remembers the card used when inserting/removing cards.

I use both slots (SD as backup) so when the camera is off and you remove the CF card for a length of time then put it back in, you'd expect the CF card to still be the "write to" card and not the SD card but because time has passed, the MkIII decides to choose the SD card as the write to card instead so I find myself checking (or sometimes forgetting) to change the write to card ¬_¬
 
mrk said:
1DX? Quite a considerable jump! :D



Yeah the MkII feels a bit less robust and looks a bit squarer than the III. The one thing (the only thing) I don't like though is that it never completely remembers the card used when inserting/removing cards.

I use both slots (SD as backup) so when the camera is off and you remove the CF card for a length of time then put it back in, you'd expect the CF card to still be the "write to" card and not the SD card but because time has passed, the MkIII decides to choose the SD card as the write to card instead so I find myself checking (or sometimes forgetting) to change the write to card ¬_¬
Click to expand...

Do you not have it write to both?
 
Not when shooting general stuff. If I'm on a job then I'll write to both. When I want to make use of the much faster CF write speeds as well I use CF only. That's where I started to notice this lack of memory.

Not a huge deal, just means I'm checking the LCD each time.
 
Put a 128G 45mb/s sandisk extreme SD in the SD slot and leave it in dual mode, swap out CF when need to, it takes 11 shots to fill the buffer.
 
Nexus said:
You can change them pretty quickly with the Q menu.
Click to expand...

Raymond Lin said:
Put a 128G 45mb/s sandisk extreme SD in the SD slot and leave it in dual mode, swap out CF when need to, it takes 11 shots to fill the buffer.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm fully aware of this of course :p My point was that it's supposed to remember the last primary card used when not in dual mode and it doesn't all the time.

The buffer fills in 11-13 shots yeah but to write the buffer takes a lot longer than it does to the CF card. During a session where I'd be making most of the burst I'd flick it to CF only (indeed, using the Q button) because as soon as the buffer fills, only takes a split second to give me another quick burst. At 7fps, it comes in handy.
 
Yeah, that's what I do.

As I seem to recall that the manual says that using dual write mode will slow it down, as its doing more processing/writing to both cards.
 
Yeah it's not a problem for the 1DX which has dual digic 5+ chips.

As I said, it's not a huge deal, just a minor inconvenience I've noticed and really the only bugbear with an otherwise epic, EPIC camera body :)
 
I would get the MkIII rather than the 1Dx personally and keep the spare £2.5-3k cash towards a super telephoto, couple of extenders and accessories. My spend on the 400mm is increasing thanks to extenders, tripod, gimbal head, storage...ideal setup is a 70-200 and 400mm if you can!

For example, the results I have seen on the 5DMKIII and the 400mm F2.8 IS II is excellent, and the AF is great from guys I have spoken to from Germany and US. I've seen some good results on sports and birding with the MkIII.

If you can invest in the new II telephotos you should. I'll post my results once the darn thing arrives, and if you are around West London you are welcome to see it.

The one thing I love about the 400mm IS II is it's Canon longest f2.8 lens and hand holdable, and it thus becomes a hand holdable monster at 560mm/f4 and 800/f5.6 with the extenders, whilst still maintaining good AF speed and minimal IQ loss. I also believe it has one of the best MTF specs if not best of any Canon lens and is ridicously sharp corner to corner wide open.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom